• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The US Senate 2016 Election: Who to Vote/Donate to in Downticket Races

Status
Not open for further replies.
V

Volimar

Member
Donate to Ted Strickland! He was a pretty stand up governor that got beat down by the auto industry slump in the recession and tea partiers pushed Kasich through to the governorship. I really think Ted would be the most bang for your buck.
 
M

Meowster

Member
I've been donating to Kander for a few months now. I thought Roy Blunt was pretty popular here but I've been hearing more and more negative things throughout the past few months and current polls show the race getting tighter. I really hope he wins but I won't be shocked if he doesn't.
 
C

Chris R

Member
Although Alaska won't go blue, we are hopefully not going to kick Murkowski out for an ultra right idiot like we almost did last time...

Still pissed about Begich :(
 
H

hodayathink

Member
ivysaur12 said:
If Duckworth doesn't win, then Ted Cruz and/or Donald Trump are our president and some safe Democratic incumbents have lost in a landslide election.
Click to expand...

Illinois in a presidential year with Barack helping campaign and Hillary on the ballot? There's no way that a statewide race like that doesn't go to the Democrats unless the person they're putting up is incompetent (which she isn't).

Makes me wish we could find someone who wasn't incompetent to run for governor (or Mayor of Chicago, for that matter). I don't even like Rauner, and I'm glad Quinn lost.
 
I

ivysaur12

Banned
hodayathink said:
Illinois in a presidential year with Barack helping campaign and Hillary on the ballot? There's no way that a statewide race like that doesn't go to the Democrats unless the person they're putting up is incompetent (which she isn't).

Makes me wish we could find someone who wasn't incompetent to run for governor (or Mayor of Chicago, for that matter). I don't even like Rauner, and I'm glad Quinn lost.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The reason to be complacent about Duckworth is... she's going to win.
 
A

akira28

Member
In MD, Van Hollen is clearly the Establishment player. Funny thing that the Congressional Black Caucus SuperPAC lowkey supports him instead of Edwards. Until you find out she unseated one of the board members when she won her seat in Congress. And he is very publicly pissed about it.

and its just their PAC which has more than its fair share of lobbyists sitting on the board. The CBC itself? conspicuously silent, but certainly not supporting the woman hoping to be the first black female Senator in the state...

but no. the CBC doesn't want a sitting black Senator to inherit Barbara Mikulsky's seat and make them even more influential in the long term...

why? Bullshit, that's why.
 
T

thcsquad

Member
hodayathink said:
Illinois in a presidential year with Barack helping campaign and Hillary on the ballot? There's no way that a statewide race like that doesn't go to the Democrats unless the person they're putting up is incompetent (which she isn't).

Makes me wish we could find someone who wasn't incompetent to run for governor (or Mayor of Chicago, for that matter). I don't even like Rauner, and I'm glad Quinn lost.
Click to expand...

All good points, but Mark Kirk isn't exactly hated here.

The fact that you don't like Quinn shows how fickle Illinois Dems actually are. Quinn was the first honest governor we had in a long time, and the first one to avoid making the pension crisis worse in even longer. Our income tax was incredibly low compared to other states, and under him it was raised to still relatively low, and we needed that money. Of course, he was rewarded with a loss to a billionaire.

I'll admit that I haven't seen any recent polling on Kirk/Duckworth, so maybe it is really far apart. But Kirk is exactly the kind of Republican who Illinois likes to elect, so we shouldn't let our guard down.

On the other hand, there are a couple of recent polls for Feingold/Johnson, and it indicates that we shouldn't be complacent there either:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...isconsin_senate_johnson_vs_feingold-3740.html

+3.5 this far out? That doesn't sound like a guaranteed win.
 
I

ivysaur12

Banned
thcsquad said:
All good points, but Mark Kirk isn't exactly hated here.

The fact that you don't like Quinn shows how fickle Illinois Dems actually are. Quinn was the first honest governor we had in a long time, and the first one to avoid making the pension crisis worse in even longer. Our income tax was incredibly low compared to other states, and under him it was raised to still relatively low, and we needed that money. Of course, he was rewarded with a loss to a billionaire.

I'll admit that I haven't seen any recent polling on Kirk/Duckworth, so maybe it is really far apart. But Kirk is exactly the kind of Republican who Illinois likes to elect, so we shouldn't let our guard down.

On the other hand, there are a couple of recent polls for Feingold/Johnson, and it indicates that we shouldn't be complacent there either:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...isconsin_senate_johnson_vs_feingold-3740.html

+3.5 this far out? That doesn't sound like a guaranteed win.
Click to expand...

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-wisconsin-senate-johnson-vs-feingold

There have been no polls that have had Johnson winning since the race started. The last 3 polls were Feingold +4, +9, +7.

You can't ignore the general swing of both states. It's the same with Warren versus Brown. No matter how strong Scott Brown was as a candidate, he can't overcome the natural gravity of the Massachusetts voting base.

Likely Wisconsin and definitely Illinois will go Democratic, and by healthy margins. There are few split ticket voters in 2016. It's unlikely either will be a Senator come this fall.
 
T

thcsquad

Member
ivysaur12 said:
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-wisconsin-senate-johnson-vs-feingold

There have been no polls that have had Johnson winning since the race started. The last 3 polls were Feingold +4, +9, +7.

You can't ignore the general swing of both states. It's the same with Warren versus Brown. No matter how strong Scott Brown was as a candidate, he can't overcome the natural gravity of the Massachusetts voting base.

Likely Wisconsin and definitely Illinois will go Democratic, and by healthy margins. There are few split ticket voters in 2016. It's unlikely either will be a Senator come this fall.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the WI link. I do feel quite a bit better about that race after looking at those other poll,s I guess RCP just sucks.

But back to IL, then why does Cook call IL a toss-up? The most anyone has it is Lean D, and that's one out of five. The recent poll shows them within the margin of error with 18% undecided?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Illinois,_2016#Predictions

Are you saying that IL's swing and the structural reasons you quoted won't manifest themselves in polling as the undecideds will pick D when they vote to match the top of the ticket? Or that you expect the poll gap to widen as time goes on?

Someone did mention the Judiciary Committee. Mark Kirk does not appear to be on the Judiciary Committee (via Wikipedia), and in fact he's been the only only Republican Senator to say that the nominee should get a hearing *and* a vote. Now, the whole thing may drag down every Republican, and I hope it does, but if any of them is going to come out of it unscathed, it's Kirk. If anything, maybe it will help him because it's going to confirm the suspicions of the moderate independents that voted for him in 2010 that he's the kind of R they like.

Not to be too particular about this, but
a. I want this thread to stay near the top and
b. Getting complacent is how you lose elections.

I get that they each have a much better chance to win than, say, Maggie Hassan. I'd put their odds at something like 75-80%. But that's far from a sure thing.
 
H

hodayathink

Member
thcsquad said:
Thanks for the WI link. I do feel quite a bit better about that race after looking at those other poll,s I guess RCP just sucks.

But back to IL, then why does Cook call IL a toss-up? The most anyone has it is Lean D, and that's one out of five. The recent poll shows them within the margin of error with 18% undecided?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Illinois,_2016#Predictions

Are you saying that IL's swing and the structural reasons you quoted won't manifest themselves in polling as the undecideds will pick D when they vote to match the top of the ticket? Or that you expect the poll gap to widen as time goes on?

Someone did mention the Judiciary Committee. Mark Kirk does not appear to be on the Judiciary Committee (via Wikipedia), and in fact he's been the only only Republican Senator to say that the nominee should get a hearing *and* a vote. Now, the whole thing may drag down every Republican, and I hope it does, but if any of them is going to come out of it unscathed, it's Kirk. If anything, maybe it will help him because it's going to confirm the suspicions of the moderate independents that voted for him in 2010 that he's the kind of R they like.

Not to be too particular about this, but
a. I want this thread to stay near the top and
b. Getting complacent is how you lose elections.

I get that they each have a much better chance to win than, say, Maggie Hassan. I'd put their odds at something like 75-80%. But that's far from a sure thing.
Click to expand...

I'm not ivy, but I would say that as far as Illinois, in addition to his statement about split ticket voters, if Kirk isn't polling better than she is right now (and their most recent poll says he isn't), then what do you actually think he's going to be able to do on the campaign trail that would actually pull him ahead of her? And especially with Illinois being a state that's going to go D in the presidential election, and the current president of the United States (and former Illinois senator) being able to come out and endorse her. Rauner won the governorship in a midterm election. Kirk won his seat in a midterm election. I just don't think he's a strong enough candidate to be able to keep his seat in a presidential year.
 
I

ivysaur12

Banned
hodayathink said:
I'm not ivy, but I would say that as far as Illinois, in addition to his statement about split ticket voters, if Kirk isn't polling better than she is right now (and their most recent poll says he isn't), then what do you actually think he's going to be able to do on the campaign trail that would actually pull him ahead of her? And especially with Illinois being a state that's going to go D in the presidential election, and the current president of the United States (and former Illinois senator) being able to come out and endorse her. Rauner won the governorship in a midterm election. Kirk won his seat in a midterm election. I just don't think he's a strong enough candidate to be able to keep his seat in a presidential year.
Click to expand...

^ this.

He can be as moderate as he wants. Illinois voters are not split ticket voters. It's a very inelastic state, and he barely won 2010.

Cook only rates it as a tossup because they're being conservative this far out because he's an incumbent, but in the end, it won't be a big race. It's not being complacent. There are literally just going to be tighter races.

And if Duckworth loses Illinois, then we've already lose the Senate and the presidency.
 
J

JHoNNy1OoO

Member
Outdoor Miner said:
As a Floridian I'm not exactly thrilled with either choice for Senate Dem side. Grayson is extremely polarizing and an asshole but Murphy has a pretty shit voting record including siding with Pubs most recently on the Syrian refugee bill.
Click to expand...

Same here man. I appreciate that Grayson is a fighter but he is his own worst enemy. He turns so many people off that would otherwise agree with him. Among my group of friends none of us can stand him. Can't believe these are our two choices for this seat.
 
V

Valhelm

contribute something
Thank you so much for this thread.

I still think Florida's Patrick Murphy might end up as Clinton's VP pick.
 
I

ivysaur12

Banned
KATIE McGINTY and CHRIS VAN HOLLEN have won their respective primaries. I'll update the OP and then do a more in-depth write-up later
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Bobby Kotick, former CEO of Activision, Interested in Buying Tik-Tok
2 3
143
11K
Gameplay Gods Bless replied
Satya Nadella: Annual letter to stockholders. Content on new platforms will continue
4 5 6 7 8
352
19K
noob smokes replied
WWE and Endeavor (UFC) announce 21 billion dollar deal.
40
3K
thefool replied
  • Locked
How The Last of Us became 'the greatest story' ever told in video games
Opinion Analysis 2 3 4 5
203
22K
Elysium44 replied
[Bustle] Please Respect Mia Khalifa’s Rebrand
6 7 8 9 10
499
72K
Maiden Voyage replied
Top Bottom